Connecticut lawmakers debate more frequent sentence modification requests

There is a debate in Connecticut about giving incarcerated people more chances to have their sentences changed. Some advocates argue that changes to the law could allow for more rehabilitation and second chances. Jack Doyle, the attorney for New Haven district, expressed his concerns about reaching out to crime victims. He noted that many victims have already faced trauma and may find repeated inquiries distressing. One person in favor of the changes is Anthony Brunetti, who spent 25 years in prison. He earned a degree, wrote a book, and advocated for criminal justice reform. He requested to have his 60-year murder sentence reduced but was denied by the judge. Under current law, he must wait five years to reapply, though a new bill could lower that to two years. Brunetti and nearly 200 others submitted testimony supporting this bill. Advocates point out that many incarcerated individuals have changed and improved over the years. Randal Chinnock, who runs the CT Second Look Sentencing Project, highlighted that people can mature and transform during long sentences. The proposed bill aims to allow judges to assess whether a person is still a risk to society after serving time. The bill could also eliminate the need for state attorneys to approve sentence modifications for certain crimes. Currently, state attorneys can influence how sentences are handled, which some critics argue limits judicial discretion. While some states have similar laws, Connecticut's approach is seen as the broadest. For instance, states like Illinois and New York allow for sentence reviews in specific circumstances, like domestic violence cases or for individuals under 18 when the crime was committed. However, there is significant opposition to the bill from various officials. Rep. Craig Fishbein argued that it undermines the legal process and may weaken victims' rights. State Victim Advocate Natasha Pierre expressed concerns that the changes might force victims to respond to applications too frequently. Others in the justice community worry about the impact on public trust in the system. Chief State’s Attorney Patrick Griffin cautioned that changing sentences could erode confidence in the judicial process. Supporters of the bill, including John Daly from the Public Defender’s Office, stressed the importance of reviewing sentences and providing opportunities for change. They argue that five years is too long to wait for another chance at sentence modification. Overall, the proposed changes are controversial, as they aim to balance rehabilitation for inmates with the rights and concerns of victims and the integrity of the justice system.